Analysts love acronyms. Jim O’Neil’s Bric has stood the test of time, and the grouping of Brazil, Russia, India, and China has been seared into financial lexicon. Today, Berenberg has coined the term "Scary", which focuses on a bank’s solvency, complexity, adaptability, risks and belief in structural change. Should we be afraid?

Despite the rather dubious acronym (the "Y" in scary stands for "Yes we do believe in structural change"), it is not a bad idea.

Berenberg’s analysts break each European bank down according to the five key factors that make up the Scary framework, with each bank scoring up to four marks for each factor.

For example, Barclays gets three marks for the capital solvency test, which measures factors such as Tier 1 capital and changes in risk weighted assets, but scores no marks for believing the banking industry is undergoing a cyclical, rather than structural change.

In comparison UBS, which recently began a wholesale reduction of its investment banking capabilities, passes the structural test with flying colours.

Berenberg’s banking analyst team, led by Nick Anderson, is particularly bearish on the European banking sector – today’s note was titled ‘European banks: Mad, bad and dangerous to know’.

Speaking to Financial News, Anderson said: “Banks have very long tail risks due to the assets they hold, so it is very important not just to think about the next quarter or the next year’s earnings. You need to look down the road, be it at trading risks or credit risks.”

And Anderson, formerly an airline analyst, knows all about firms in decline. Over a decade ago, he applied the same framework, albeit without a catchy title, to the airline industry.

Related

It worked. The airlines with the three highest scores (Lufthansa, Air France and BA) survived and low scorers Alitalia, Iberia and KLM were taken over.

According to today’s research note: “That it worked for airlines does not imply it will work for banks of course. However, what the analysis does show is that during periods of major upheaval in an industry, not all incumbents will survive. Identifying long-term winners and losers is therefore a critical task for all investors in banks to undertake.”

So who is predicted to survive? Handelsbanken, HSBC, ING, KBC, Swedbank and UBS are all earmarked for long term survival. And if you are a Spanish, Italian or French bank, be afraid. Be very afraid.